Adolf Hitler vs. Joseph Stalin

By reComparison Contributor

34

30171

Difference between Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin

Although both Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler are remembered world over as notorious individuals responsible for the murder of millions of innocent 20th century civilians and soldiers, they are also distinctive historical figures in their own rights and there are enough similarities between them to warrant frequent comparisons. Both were very charismatic figures for starters, and both were reviled and admired in almost equal measure. Both were also responsible for massive numbers of needless deaths and the immense suffering and of millions of people either directly or indirectly, and they changed the course of history in significant ways. Let's take a look at what else they have in common and how they differ.

In Brief

Adolf Hitler’s main claim to fame was his role as the leader of the Third Reich. He was also one of the key leaders of the Nazi party and it was these dual roles that made him so instrumental in the outbreak of World War II. Joseph Stalin for his part was the leader of the Soviet Union until 1953 and he was largely responsible for the Great Purges of 1937 and the collectivization in Russia that resulted in millions of deaths in his own country.

Positioning

Both men took advantage of increasingly turbulent political climates in their respective countries in order to assume positions of power. The main differences are that Hitler assumed control through a mostly democratic process and slow political maneuverings, while Stalin had to contend with numerous political adversaries, which he did so by forging–and subsequently breaking–key alliances.

Power - In the Details

Hitler first enlisted the German Workers Party in 1919, and it wasn't long before he transformed it into the Nazi Party and assumed the leadership role. By the 1930s, the party had evolved into a formidable political force and Hitler was soon appointed chancellor to replace the ineffectual Kurt von Schleicher. Subsequent political maneuverings caused the banning of all other political parties in the country and Germany essentially became a single party state with Hitler at the helm. Stalin on the other hand, was already an active member in an authoritarian state and he didn't have to contend with the struggle to gain mass acceptance as Hitler did. Nevertheless, Stalin did have to eliminate numerous obstacles to his leadership and he did this as the secretary of the Communist Party by effectively getting rid of Trotsky, former allies Kamenev and Zinoview, and the right-wing Bukharin, whom he used to get rod of the latter two and subsequently broke alliances with as well.

Summary

Adolf Hitler

Was the Fuhrer of the Third Reich and one of the leaders of the Nazi Party

Was widely blamed for the outbreak of World War II and the holocaust

Rise to power was much shorter than Stalin's

Became the sole leader of Germany in only 19 months

Joined the German Workers Party in 1919 and converted it into Nazi Party

Joseph Stalin

Was a leader of the Soviet Union until 1953

Was widely blamed for the Great Purges in 1937 and the collectivization movement which caused untold suffering in Russia

Came to power slowly and had to eliminate many contenders

Came to power in an already authoritarian state in which he was previously involved

If Stalin killed so much more people then Hitler and Hitler didn't realize what he was doing was wrong then why is Hitler still better known and more negative attention pointed towards him? ...Rather then Stalin??

Both are just as vicious and evil. Hitler Did know what he was doing against the jews, he was the one giving the orders to cappture kill and put jews and orter foreigners in camps. Stalin also put people in camps, and the reason he killed more is because he had the power longer then hitler. How moore people do you think hitler would have killed if he had succeded taking over Sovjet union. Both are equally evil!

Stalin purposely killed 20 million of his own people, sent 18 million to the Gulag, 6 million sent to exile and almost starved his country into oblivion,whereas Hitler took his country from one of the poorest economies in the world to one the greatest in the shortest amount of time, hence why he was man of the year on the cover of Time magazine in the 1930's. He meant well for his country and people but had the warped notion that jews were inferior and only the Arian people deserved to live in the world. If Hitler came to power he would have eventually gain world power through war and kill off most of the human race. At least Stalin was keeping to his own. He didn't have the world domination complex like Hitler did. He only killed his own people. Both were evil!

Both were out to dominate the world. Both interred millions in camps/gulags. Both had millions slaughtered, more civilians than military. Both had constituencies they hated. Both "meant well" as their distorted/sick minds defined it. They did have very different perspectives, but both led to evil outcomes. "Meaning well" but doing bad things is still an excuse we hear today even in in our country, and especially in the middle east. Politicians today accept bad outcomes of their own parties if the actions were aligned with the party lines, i.e. "they meant well." If they outcomes are terrible, they were wrong.